| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Logical Replication of sequences |
| Date: | 2025-12-22 05:38:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+rnjBOvkiQC2r4LuTwuje653iVPPAXcmJZXPpKvsNbOQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 12:37 PM Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> While working on another thread, I noticed a bug introduced by commit
> as part of this thread.
> In function pg_get_publication_tables, We have code:
> ```
> if (pub_elem->alltables)
> pub_elem_tables = GetAllPublicationRelations(RELKIND_RELATION,
> pub_elem->pubviaroot);
> else
> {
> List *relids,
> *schemarelids;
>
> relids = GetPublicationRelations(pub_elem->oid,
> pub_elem->pubviaroot ?
> PUBLICATION_PART_ROOT :
> PUBLICATION_PART_LEAF);
> schemarelids = GetAllSchemaPublicationRelations(pub_elem->oid,
> pub_elem->pubviaroot ?
> PUBLICATION_PART_ROOT :
> PUBLICATION_PART_LEAF);
> pub_elem_tables = list_concat_unique_oid(relids, schemarelids);
> }
> ```
>
> So, when we create an 'ALL SEQUENCE publication' and we execute
> 'SELECT * from pg_publication_tables'
> We will enter the else condition in the above code, which does not
> seem correct to me.
> It will call functions which are not required to be called. It will
> also call the function 'GetPublicationRelations' which contradicts the
> comment above this function.
>
I see that we will needlessly call GetPublicationRelations or others
for all_schema publication but is there any problem/bug due to that?
AFAICS, the function will still return correct results. Yes, there is
an argument to better performance for large numbers of all_sequence
publications and that too in DDL like Create/Alter Subscription. I am
not sure that it is really worth adding more checks at multiple places
in the code though we can improve comments atop
GetPublicationRelations. I feel if we encounter such cases in the
field then it makes sense to add these additional optimizations at
various places.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kirill Reshke | 2025-12-22 05:47:37 | Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2025-12-22 05:24:18 | Re: Orphaned records in pg_replication_origin_status after subscription drop |